"...a Chessmaster should be a combination of a beast of prey and a monk."

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

English game

I've been playing the English for a few months now.  Not sure if I will continue, I like some things about it.  It can give some fun maneuvering type situations.  On the other hand the opening sometimes feels quite restrictive about what will follow.  e4 definitely seems to give move variety.  Regardless I have had some interesting games, and feel I am learning if nothing else.

The first analysis is by hand. I focused mostly on a position where he already had pressure against my king and I made a move with not much to say for it.  I thought another move in the same position might save me but it seems not. The blunder check analysis shows that I am already lost, though I could defend better than my weak move for sure.

What I did for the IDeA analysis was to put in my hand analysis file and then told the computer to analyze every position.  My thought was that this would be a good way to go through and see what the computer thinks of the analysis I did.  Two things here. First off I haven't had a lot of time to play with it. I think IDeA is best when you really have time to make it interactive and explore.  Also, I did a bad job by putting a pretty messy file into the analysis. Many of my variations are weak or bad even to my own eye reviewing them.  I will try again with my updated file when I have a chance.

Any comments are welcome.

JabotScrob (1448) - Jmb27 (1585)

Result: 0-1
Site: Chess.com
Date: 2015.02.20
[...] 1.c4 e5 2.♘c3 ♘f6 3.g3 h6 He leaves book. 4.♗g2 d6 5.♘f3 ♘c6 6.O-O ♗e7 7.d3 O-O 8.♖b1 a5 9.a3 ♗e6 10.b4 axb4 11.axb4 ♖b8 12.b5 ♘d4 13.♘d2 d5 14.e3 ♘f5 15.e4 dxe4 16.♘dxe4 ♘d4 17.♘a4 ♘xe4 18.♗xe4 f5 19.♗g2 f4 20.gxf4 exf4 21.f3 This seems pretty horrible, blocking the bishop in and leaving the black pawn on f4, but it was the best I could come up with. 21...♕d7 22.♗b2 ♘f5 23.♕e2 ♘e3 24.♖fe1 ♗h4 25.♘c5 ♕f7 26.♘xe6 ♕xe6 27.♖ec1 ♖be8 28.♖a1
28.♗d428...♕g6 this move seems to do me in though (28...♘f5 29.♕xe6 ♖xe6 30.♗c3 ♖g6 31.♖b2 ♖e8I think I'm ok)
28...♖f5 29.♗xe3 (29.♗h3 ♖g5 30.♔h1 ♕xh3−⁠+) 29...♕xe3 30.♕xe3 ♖xe3 31.♖b3
31.d4 ♖g5 32.♔h1 (32.♖f1 ♖e2−⁠+) 32...♖e2 33.♖g1 ♖d2 34.♖bd1 ♖xd1 35.♖xd1looks ok
31.♖d1 ♖e2 32.♔h1 ♖g5 33.♖g1 (33.♗h3 ♖f2bad) 33...♖e3 34.♖bd1
31...♖g5 (31...♖e2) 32.♖f1 ♖e2−⁠+
28...♘xg2 29.♕xg2 I give a mate threat, but he has many ways to reply. Still, this seems ok for me.
29.♗xe3 ♖xe3
(29.♔h1 ♘xc4)
28...♖f5 29.♔h1 (29.♗d4 ♖g5 30.♗xe3 ♕xe3 31.♕xe3 ♖xe3 32.d4 ♖e2) 29...♖g5 ()
Powered by Aquarium

JabotScrob (1448) - Jmb27 (1585)

Result: 0-1
Site: Chess.com
Date: 2015.02.20
[...] 1.c4 e5 2.♘c3 ♘f6 3.g3 h6 4.♗g2 d6 5.♘f3 ♘c6 6.O-O ♗e7 7.d3 O-O 8.♖b1 a5 9.a3 ♗e6 10.b4 axb4 11.axb4 ♖b8? +0.48
11...♘b8 12.e4 c6 13.♘h4 ♘a6 14.b5 ♘c5 15.♘f5 ♗xf5 16.exf5 ♕d7 17.f4 +0.20
12.b5 ♘d4 13.♘d2? +0.25
13.♘xd4 exd4 14.♘d5 ♘xd5 15.cxd5 ♗d7 16.♕c2 ♗f6 17.♖b4 ♖c8 18.♗b2 ♕e8 +0.48
13...d5? +1.13
13...♗g4 14.h3 ♗d7 15.♗a3 ♖a8 16.♖a1 c6 17.e3 ♘e6 18.h4 ♘c5 19.d4 +0.25
14.e3 ♘f5? +1.86 (14...dxc4 15.exd4 +1.13) 15.e4? -0.16
15.cxd5 ♗c8 (15...♘xd5 16.♘xd5 ♗xd5 17.♗xd5 ♕xd5) 16.♘c4 ♘d7 17.b6 ♘xb6 18.♘xe5 ♗f6 19.f4 ♘d7 20.d4 ♘d6 +1.86
15...dxe4 16.♘dxe4 ♘d4? +0.16
16...♘xe4 17.♗xe4 ♗d6 18.♖e1 ♖e8 19.♗d5 ♗c5 20.♗xe6 ♖xe6 21.♗b2 ♘d4 22.♘d5 -0.21
17.♘a4? -0.69 (17.♘xf6 ♗xf6 +0.16) 17...♘xe4 18.♗xe4 f5? -0.45
18...♕d7 19.♗e3 ♗g4 20.f3 ♗e6 21.f4 ♖a8 22.♘c3 exf4 23.gxf4 ♗g4 24.♕d2 -0.69
19.♗g2 f4 20.gxf4? -1.29 (20.♗e4 ♕d7 -0.45) 20...exf4 21.f3 ♕d7? -0.90
21...♗f5 22.♘c3 ♘e6 23.♘d5 ♗c5 24.♔h1 ♕h4 25.♗d2 ♖bd8 26.♗e1 ♕g5 27.♗a5 -1.29
22.♗b2? -2.10
22.♖e1 ♖bd8 23.♔h1 ♖f7 24.♘c3 ♗g5 25.b6 c5 26.♘e4 ♕c6 27.♗b2 ♗h4 -0.90
22...♘f5 23.♕e2 ♘e3 24.♖fe1 ♗h4? -1.48
24...♗f5 25.♗f1 ♖fe8 26.♕f2 ♕d8 27.♖xe3 fxe3 28.♕e2 ♖a8 29.♘c3 ♗f6 30.♘e4 -2.85
25.♘c5 ♕f7 26.♘xe6? -2.26 (26.♖ec1 ♗f5 -1.48) 26...♕xe6 27.♖ec1 ♖be8 28.♖a1? -4.06 (28.♔h1 ♕g6 29.c5 ♘g4 30.♕c2 ♘f2 31.♔g1 ♘xd3 32.♖d1 ♖d8 33.c6 b6 -1.64) 28...♖f5 29.♔h1 ♖g5 30.♖g1 ♕g6 31.♗h3 ♘xc4? -0.78
31...♘g4 32.♕xe8 ♕xe8 33.♗xg4 ♕e2 34.b6 c6 35.♖g2 ♕xd3 36.♖ag1 h5 37.♗e6 -3.38
32.♖xg5 ♗xg5 33.♕c2? -2.01
33.♗f5 ♕f7 34.♗e4 ♘d6 35.♕c2 ♗f6 36.♗xf6 ♕xf6 37.♖g1 ♘xe4 38.dxe4 ♕e5 -0.78
33...♘xb2 34.♕xb2 ♕xd3 35.♕a2 ♔h8 36.♕f7 ♖d8? -1.24
36...♕xf3 37.♗g2 ♕e2 38.♕f5 b6 39.♖f1 ♕e5 40.♕xe5 ♖xe5 41.♗c6 ♔h7 42.♔g2 -2.46
37.♕xc7? -299.88
37.♖e1 ♗h4 38.♖e8 ♖xe8 39.♕xe8 ♔h7 40.♕d7 ♕xd7 41.♗xd7 ♔g6 42.♔g2 ♗e7 -1.24
37...♕xb5? -1.35
37...♕xf3 38.♔g1 ♕e3 39.♔h1 ♕xh3 40.♕c2 ♕f3 41.♔g1 ♗f6 42.♕g2 ♕e3 43.♕f2 -299.88
38.♖e1 ♕b4 39.♖c1 b5 40.♗f1 ♕b3? -1.03
40...♕a3 41.♕c6 b4 42.♖e1 ♕a8 43.♕xa8 ♖xa8 44.♗b5 ♖a3 45.♖e4 b3 46.♗d3 -1.54
41.♕c6? -1.52
41.♕b7 b4 42.♖c8 ♕b1 43.♔g2 ♕g6 44.♔h1 ♕d6 45.♗c4 ♗e7 46.♖xd8 ♕xd8 -1.03
41...b4 42.♗e2? -3.87
42.♖e1 ♕d5 43.♕xd5 ♖xd5 44.♗c4 ♖d7 45.♔g2 ♔h7 46.♔h3 ♖d4 47.♗f7 ♗d8 -1.52
42...♕b2? -1.85
42...♕e3 43.♗a6 b3 44.♖b1 ♗f6 45.♗b7 b2 46.♕c2 ♕d3 47.♕xd3 ♖xd3 48.♔g2 -3.87
43.♖c2 ♕e5 44.♕xh6
Powered by Aquarium

Thursday, March 5, 2015

The King of Jacking Around

As is probably obvious from the scattershot posts on this blog, I'm not a terribly disciplined person. This is particularly obvious in comparison to some of the other chess improvement bloggers.

At least since my last post I have been doing more studying. I have been working through two books. Susan Polgar's "Chess Tactics For Champions".  And Walter Browne's "The Stress of Chess".

The S. Polgar book is a bit on the easy side, but there are usually one or two stumpers in each chapter.  This is a book I picked up at the public library at the end of 2011 when I first started getting interested in chess again.  I thought it was pretty good so I got a copy.  I've tried a couple of times, but for some reason the first chapter on double attacks seemed to give me problems, despite some of them being pretty easy.  So I've not really worked on it. Recently I picked it up and started on a later chapter and have been cruising with it.

It's on the model of presenting a tactical motif, pins, skewers, double attacks, trapped pieces, etc. And then giving some problems on that topic.  To a certain extent I have avoided this kind of model.  My thinking was just that it is already a big hint that the problem tells you there's a tactic.  If you know the kind of tactic you are looking for that seems to make the problems very artificial and more divorced from actual practice.  However, I have revised this idea a bit. Probably it's good to do the tactics where you don't know what to expect (and I would like to give the new "mixed mode" at chess tempo a real try), but that doesn't mean that practicing the specific ideas is a bad thing either.  This more directed kind of practice can just familiarize me with a certain kind of idea, and then I am more likely to give that kind of idea a try when I am looking for something.

As far as the Browne book goes, I am enjoying it a lot. It's kind of over my head, in that a fair bit of it isn't really clear to me why certain moves were made.  On the other hand, he provides a lot of explanation and a lot of variations. The interesting thing is that many of these variation will provide some sort of tactics puzzles.  Basically you come to some move that seems quite counter-intuitive, particularly situations where it seems one side could win some material or something but doesn't, then you have to search for the reason that move wasn't made.  A lot of times I am able to do this and so the process, even if I don't 100% understand the game still ends up being an active educational experience.

Resolutions going forward: Try to finish things more.  I want to work through these two books and to the end. Also, to finish some of the other things I've started and gone through particularly the Zurich '53 books.

There are many things I would like to study. But of course we all only have limited time as well as our personal issues of character.

I would also like to get back to doing some more blogging. I would like to focus on posting game analysis.  I have a game right now that I played a couple weeks ago. First I ran through it by hand on my own to see what improvements I could find. Then I ran it through a regular blunder check computer analysis.  I'm doing another run with the IDeA setup in Aquarium. Basically, I will try to combine them and then post it.